Requirements for Patent Protection ·Novelty If the idea is already known Nothing of value has been produced ·Non-obviousness If anyone who needs the idea can easily hire someone to produce it Not much of value has been produced Not worth more than six months of protection-which isn't an option Usefulness.Old definition:Not pernicious Story:"a new invention to poison people,or to promote debauchery,or to facilitate private assassination,is not a patentable invention" So viagra should not be patentable,James Bond devices are Ricard vs Du Bon:"It's pernicious,so the patent I am infringing is invalid" But not illegal,so I should be able to do it too" Argument for the old definition:If the inventor wants to waste money getting a patent on something nobody wants to do,why should we object? New definition:Useless means not useful. ·Yet. Requirements for Patent Protection • Novelty • If the idea is already known • Nothing of value has been produced • Non-obviousness • If anyone who needs the idea can easily hire someone to produce it • Not much of value has been produced • Not worth more than six months of protection—which isn’t an option • Usefulness. Old definition: Not pernicious • Story: “a new invention to poison people, or to promote debauchery, or to facilitate private assassination, is not a patentable invention” • So viagra should not be patentable, James Bond devices are • Ricard vs Du Bon: “It’s pernicious, so the patent I am infringing is invalid” • But not illegal, so I should be able to do it too” • Argument for the old definition: If the inventor wants to waste money getting a patent on something nobody wants to do, why should we object? • New definition: Useless means not useful. • Yet